[arrl-odv:11966] Re: IRLP ContestYou wrote: "The fact that guys would spend time kvetching about it is a sadder commentary than anything I can think of." It may very well be sad, and the crawl may have dropped from sight, but neither of those items lead me to believe that we should not be sorry that it happened, or that the concerns of some of our members should be brushed aside in such a cavalier manner. Bob -- W6RGG ----- Original Message ----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ To: arrl-odv Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 5:34 PM Subject: [arrl-odv:11968] Re: IRLP Contest And lest we forget, the ARRL Board named K1RFD the winner of the 2002 Technical Innovation Award for developing Echolink. Is an IRLP contest silly? Personally, I think it is. But there are a lot of things I enjoy in amateur radio that others find silly -- such as trading 599s and calling it communication. And in any case, we're not the sponsors. We provided some publicity. It's already scrolled well down the news crawl. The fact that guys would spend time kvetching about it is a sadder commentary than anything I can think of. Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Mileshosky, Brian N5ZGT (Vice Dir, RM) Sent: Wed 3/16/2005 11:09 PM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: [arrl-odv:11966] Re: IRLP Contest Bob, I can't speak for Rev in terms of comments received from within my Division, but my understanding is that IRLP always requires a radio -- unlike Echolink, I can't talk to someone via my computer's microphone. I have to use some kind of RF link (namely a repeater) that then taps into the internet and pops back out as RF somewhere else. In that case, a license is always required, as is a radio. More experienced IRLP users are free to correct me if I'm in error. This is based on my limited use of IRLP and through referring to the IRLP website. In future replies to your members and those on the CQ Contest list, you might mention the above and recommend a visit to www.irlp.net in an effort to lay some of the preconceived notions to rest. I personally don't see a problem with ARRL specifically stating the contest's sponsorship, lack thereof, or not mentioning either. By putting it on our website we are, in essence, promoting "interest in Amateur Radio communications and experimentation," one of our reasons for being as stated on the "About the ARRL" page within our website. 73, Brian, N5ZGT ARRL Vice-Director, Rocky Mountain Division On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, R. B. Vallio wrote: > I haven' seen anyone address this on ODV, so I will bring to everyone's > attention. Please take a look at: > > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/03/14/3/?nc=1 > > before you read further. > > This is an announcement of an IRLP contest, on our WebPages, with no > indication of any sort that sponsorship is not by the ARRL. The CQ Contest > reflector was filled with comments on March 14, the first day the > announcement appeared, and although the number is down, there are still > comments being made. > > The thought of the ARRL sponsoring a contest where entrants need not have a > radio or a license to participate, has certainly sparked some comments from > Pacific Division members. I believe that there is no harm in mentioning it, > but that a disclaimer of ARRL sponsorship should have been included. Have > any of you folks received any mail on the subject? Thanks. > > Bob -- W6RGG